Lawgist100Words expressing relationship denote only legitimate relatives or failing such relatives reputed legitimate
In the absence of any intimation to the contrary in a will, the word "child," the word "son", the word "daughter" or any word which expresses relationship, is to be understood as denoting only a legitimate relative, or, where there is no such legitimate relative, a person who has acquired, at the date of the Will, the reputation of being such relative.
Illustrations
(i) A having three children, B, C and A of whom B and Care legitimate and D is illegitimate leaves his property to be equally divided among "my children". The property belongs to B and C in equal shares, to the exclusion of D.
(ii) A, having a niece of illegitimate birth, who has acquired the reputation of being his niece and having no legitimate niece, bequeaths a sum of money to his niece. The illegitimate niece is entitled to the legacy.
(iii) A, having in his Will enumerated his children, and named as one of them B, who is illegitimate, leaves a legacy to "my said children". B Will take a share in the legacy along with the legitimate children.
(iv) A leaves a legacy to "the children of B". B is dead and has left none but illegitimate children. All those who had at the date of the Will acquired the reputation of being the children of B are objects of the gift.
(v) A bequeaths a legacy to "the children of B". B never had any legitimate child. C and D had, at the date of the Will, acquired the reputation of being children of B. After the date of the Will and before the death of the testator, E and F were born, and acquired the reputation of being children of B. Only C and D are objects of the bequest.
(vi) A makes a bequest in favour of his child by a certain woman, not his wife. B had acquired at the date of the Will the reputation of being the child of A by the woman designated. B takes the legacy.
(vii) A makes a bequest in favour of his child to be born of a woman who never becomes his wife. The bequest is void.
(viii) A makes a bequest in favour of the child of which a certain woman, not married to him, is pregnant. The bequest is void.
Download our fully-offline, High speed android app.- Click here
- 74 Wording of wills
- 75 Inquiries to determine questions as to object or subject of will
- 76 Misnomer or misdescription of object
- 77 When words may be supplied
- 78 Rejection of erroneous particulars in description of subject
- 79 When part of description may not be rejected as erroneous
- 80 Extrinsic evidence admissible in cases of patent ambiguity
- 81 Extrinsic evidence inadmissible in case of patent ambiguity or deficiency
- 82 Meaning or clause to be collected from entire Will
- 83 When words may be understood in restricted sense, and when in sense wider than usual
- 84 Which of two possible constructions preferred
- 85 No part rejected, if it can be reasonably construed
- 86 Interpretation of words repeated in different parts of will
- 87 Testator’s intention to be effectuated as far as possible
- 88 The last of two inconsistent clauses prevails
- 89 Will or bequest void for uncertainty
- 90 Words describing subject refer to property answering description at testator’s death
- 91 Power of appointment executed by general bequest
- 92 Implied gift to objects of power in default of appointment
- 93 Bequest to “heirs,” etc., of particular person without qualifying terms
- 94 Bequest to “representatives”, etc., of particular person
- 95 Bequest without words of limitation
- 96 Bequest in alternative
- 97 Effect of words describing a class added to bequest to person
- 98 Bequest to class of persons under general description only
- 99 Construction of terms
- 100 Words expressing relationship denote only legitimate relatives or failing such relatives reputed legitimate
- 101 Rules of construction where will purports to make two bequests to same person
- 102 Constitution of residuary legatee
- 103 Property to which residuary legatee entitled
- 104 Time of vesting legacy in general terms
- 105 In what case legacy lapses
- 106 Legacy does not lapse if one of two joint legatees die before testator
- 107 Effect of words showing testator’s intention to give distinct shares
- 108 When lapsed share goes as undisposed of
- 109 When bequest to testator’s child or lineal descendant does not lapse on his death in testator’s lifetime
- 110 Bequest to A for benefit of B does not lapse by A’s death
- 111 Survivorship in case of bequest to described class
